[SIDE] Vaygr

-General-
Side Name: United Vaygr Clans

Ruler Name: Supreme Warlord Makaan

Favored Terrain: Plains

Description:
HISTORY: The Vaygr. A group of formerly disunited but extremely similar sides, with the main ones being the clans of Vay, Pak'ra, and ShE'va. Vay managed to form a unified clan with ShE'va, and overwhelmed the Pak'ra and in short order the rest of the Vaygr clans. To this day the Supreme Warlordship alternates between those who formerly belonged to Clans Vay and ShE'va.
BIOLOGY: Standard humans. Extremely violent standard humans. Do not get between them and something they want. Ever.
WARFARE TACTICS: The Vaygr emphasize specialization above all else. Their units are popped with a sole purpose, and they stick to it, come hell, high water, or Titanic assault.

Livery: Black background with a centered red eye and flames leaping up from the bottom. This is the combined livery of Clan Vay (red eye on black) and Clan ShE'va (flames on black).

-Units-

Infantry:

Spoiler:

Special:

Spoiler:

Navy:

Spoiler:

My own little notes: Yes, these are inspired by the Homeworld 2 Vaygr. Kinda. Then I made basically everything else up. And yes, all the capitals in odd places (ShE'va and suchlike...) are intentional. Vaygr speech is funny.

Oh man, Homeworld... that takes me way back.

Homeworld 2 isn't that old. I still play it, even, since it's still awesome and damn near unparraleled. Opinions on the side?

Also, I get the feeling a bunch of Relentlesses commanded by a Low Warlord would be quite terrifying.

I have one glaring problem with your side, and I havent really started nitpicking (mathamancin) yet. You have 2 knights, 2 stabbers and 3 archers, you can only have ONE of each.

Beyond the glaring problem with the side, the Mathamancy is good with a single exception:
You've only spent 18 points on the Low Warlords. This could be a problem.

And, for this one, I'm guessing non-Royal .

Okay, kind of obvious, but I always like to ask questions, just in case...

1. Yes, non-royal.

2. Whadaya mean, only 18? Kindly explain.

3. Why can I only have one of each? That seems a little restrictive. It prevents people from having specialist units, and makes every side only cosmetically different at BEST! Come on, people!

Leadership=4; Dance-Fighting=4; +5 Combat=5; +5 Defense=5; 4+4+5+5=18.

One major reason to limit the number of units a side can have is that it becomes unmanageable to have 7 basic unit types. And having 2 different kinds of Knight-class Infantry is pretty overpowered. Just imagine if I'd delegated the Leadership (with Dance-Fighting) to a second Knight-class Infantry, leaving my first able to take Limited Whatevermancy along with Dollamancy. (Probably Moneymancy). Or imagine if I could have three.

The low number of units forces sides to specialize on the level of the side rather than the unit.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by the "cosmetically different at BEST!" F'rinstance, Twoy and I have almost identical basic units (only difference is that he put a point into Defense on his Scout, I put that point into Move), but our Special units (and Naval, for that matter) are wildly different. His Dwarves are support units, they're designed to make money for him (I think). My Weavile are designed to croak stuff. His Minotaurs are slow Siege units, my Glaceon are light cav. Those are some pretty major differences. And these also mean that we'll use our identical basic units differently. Because he'll use his Minotaurs to take cities with strong air defenses, he can afford to send along a few of his Soldiers with them. To send my Medicham(identical to his Soldiers), I have to make my campaigns 4 times longer, and 4 times better planned.

I still think it's ridiculous to be limited to one troop per type. I mean, we've seen STANLEY's army has more types than this. And they've shown stabbers with varied types of weapons, which seems to me to indicate different types of stabber.

...no he doesn't o_O Gobwin Knob can only pop one type. Their "other" infantry comes from their use of natural allies, Gobwins and Hobgobwins, who both have stabber-class infantry.

Also, I believe the weapon they use doesn't really indicate anything other aesthetic interest.

... So is there any good reason why I can only have one unit per type?

Good reason: "it becomes unmanageable" for the GM. Game over. No GM.

Just what I was going to type.

Other reason, it worked fine with the amount of units we have in Kaeds Erfgame

EDIT: Also canon: http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/Gobwin_Knob#City_Production

Nihilia said it perfectly. More than one type per class lends itself too much to munchkining.

Also if you want variety, there WILL be natural allies (all with their personal "agenda's" and interdiplomatic relations (no marbits with gobwins etc)) and there WILL be barbarians wich you can sweet-talk into helping you out.

I say if I can't create my race in a REASONABLE way, I'm not making one.

Well, you have a good side concept, the units have good fluff, so that would be a pity.

Also, I found a quote from Kaed, the GM of the last game, that I think applies to this situation, even if the rule he's discussing isn't in this game:

Kaed wrote:(Level 2 Cities gain the the ability to build the unit choice you chose not to build during Level 1, and they produce faster. Alternatively, if you picked SU C during Level 1, you may pick another single C-type unit instead of the A/B choice. The reverse is not really applicable because managing 4 different weaker Special Unit types in one capital is difficult and gives too broad a range of possible Specials.)

This is the munchkining point Sir Shadow and I have been making--duplicate units yield way too many Special options, especially duplicate Knight-class Infantry. If 4 weaker Special units are too much to manage (compared to 2), how hard are 7 basic units going to be (compared to 4)? If 4 A/B Specials open up too many options for specials, 2 Knight class Infantry will also.

My classes with multiple units in them don't have specials. You might try to remember that before mentioning a specials point.

Yeah, well, the point is this: If one player can create multiple Knight-class units, why can't the others?

[crickets--there's not really any good reason why one person should be given the advantage of superior variety at the outset, for no cost]

What stops the other players from giving those units Specials, given that the rules explicitly allow them to?

[crickets]

What stops anyone from duplicating their A/B units? C-units? All are weaker than a Knight. In fact, what stops a player, once someone else has duplicated a Knight, from making 4 A/B units?--Exactly what Kaed said would make things unmanageable.

doom3607 wrote:I say if I can't create my race in a REASONABLE way, I'm not making one.

Then don't make one. If you can't act in a reasonable way, make your side in adherence to the rules, and accept the explanations given for them, then we probably don't want you in the game. I'd probably be more willing to work with you if you didn't sound like some whiny 12 y/o, but the rules stand as they are.

All of your infantry might not have specials, but all the different ones have different stats. We feel that that just gives too many options, does not follow canon, and unnecessarily burdens the game.

...Edited. And if you aren't willing to work with someone because they sound irritated, you maybe shouldn't be running this sort of game.
Because people do have problems with the rules sometimes. So learn to deal with it.

Also fixed the Low Warlords. They now have 3 more attack and defence, making them rather more painful than before.

Wow.

*Mental Note: Make extensive preparations before fighting Low Warlords.*

And, people get a little defensive of rules sometimes... I've been guilty of this in some of my games, actually. (In fact, I've found thetobias surprisingly flexible with his rules.)

I understand people are going to have problems the rules, hell, I've had problems with the rules. But replying rudely and whining aren't going to change it. If you want something to change I'd go to the Rules Discussion board and calmly write out what you want changed and how it will benefit the game as a whole.

Nihila wrote:Wow.
*Mental Note: Make extensive preparations before fighting Low Warlords.*

It's worse than you think- I plan on deploying them only leading stacks consisting of them and seven Relentlesses. Sound scary? That's the point. *cue evil laugh*

Query: Can the Vaygr start off way far away from everyone? One of the bits I liked most about them in HW2 is that they came from the "Vaygr Reaches", which I think sounds a little awesome. As such, I'd like to be able to make same in this game...

The Titans work in mysterious ways...
soooo maybe?